RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,777
Posts: 5,216,981
Members: 24,216
Currently online: 693
Newest member: momogila

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 23 2008, 09:49 PM   #451
Sharr Khan
Rear Admiral
 
Sharr Khan's Avatar
 
Location: USA Ct
View Sharr Khan's Twitter Profile
Re: Enterprise Pic

not when a ship OLDER than the Connie has been shown to be built into orbit...
But it never actually was being shown built in space - The only thing we know for sure they were putting the paint on the NX-01 in a drydock. We have no certain idea if its parts and pieces weren't built first on Earth.

But we do know that Galaxy-Class ships (a great deal larger then the NX-01 at that) get constructed first on Mar's surface...

There's no problem here.

Sharr
Sharr Khan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 09:52 PM   #452
Arlo
Fleet Captain
 
Arlo's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise Pic

I love how people are jumping to absolutist conclusions of how things will appear in a movie that is a year away based on some grainy little videos and quick flashes of obscured details in the teaser.

Amazing.
__________________
"Even with all its blemishes, Trek XI still teabags the bloated corpses that were Insurrection and Nemesis and managed to make Trek fun again." - Sheep
Arlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 09:54 PM   #453
BolianAuthor
Writer, Battlestar Urantia
 
Location: Torrance, California
Send a message via AIM to BolianAuthor Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to BolianAuthor
Re: Enterprise Pic

^

Don't you dare look at me with that assumption... I merely posted my feelings and explained them, and when someone challenged my remark, I just came back and defended my position.
BolianAuthor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 10:10 PM   #454
rideop1
Ensign
 
Re: Enterprise Pic

If this is the way it will look, that isn't bad. However I stand by this opinion. I would hope that Abrams wonít make the same mistakes that Berman made. The reason Star Trek has lasted so long is the loyalty of itís fans and staying true (for the most part) to Gene Roddenberryís concept. Changing the ENTERPRISE for TMP was a an upgrade not a re-imagining, We are talking about the Grand Old Lady Now, Donít F&*K with the Original Enterprise. Doing so is like Ignoring the Prime Directive. I understand todayís audiences want more realism, and such. well show the Old Girl the way Roddenberry wanted. Show her the way she looks in the Smithsonian. The lighting in the 60ís washed out all her texturing etc. With CGI, they can make her look the way she was supposed to. Accent details, donít Change her design. People always say that Ron Moore's New design of the Galactica was well received. Not by the fans I have spoken to. Moore's interpretation of the show was good, but Frankly the Galactica and the Pegasus new look SUCKED! But this is Star Trek, A higher standard is expected, and owed to the Loyal fans. VEKTOR's Conceptual photos were very good, However Gabe Koerner went to far, he seems to have just added bulk wherever it would fit. As for Interior SetsÖÖÖthe changing of sets on TOS were over time, gradual and subtle as well as the Motion Picture Sets. if this is supposed to be Kirkís 1st or earlier missions fine, subtle accentuation on set design will work, but you canít make supposed older designs to be changed so drastically. Alot of you say, who cares about Canon, or Canon has nothing to do with the Ship itself and set design. You're all either just plain Nuts, or not the devoted fans you think you are. There is such a thing as consistency. Are you non-purists and the movie makers willing to piss off and alienate the loyal fans of decades just to bring in some new viewers? Star Trek is Star Trek, I sincerely doubt that many non-fans will flood into theaters to see it. Unfortunately Non-Fans have a preconceived notion that it is silly and campy. some may come out of curiosity, but that is all. And furthermore, if they are new viewers to the franchise, they wonít know that things weren't changed anyway. The set design could use some subtle embellishment for realism and detail. Roddenberry's original wish that the still photos on the bridge above duty stations be smaller working view screens as seen on "Enterprise", would be a good start. I'm talking about SUBTLE accentuation to the original design. Modern audiences have already seen how the Original Enterprise bridge should appear, from "RELICS"-TNG, "TRIALS & TRIBBLATIONS"-DS9, and "IN A MIRROR DARKLY"-Enterprise. So stick with what works and has worked for 40 years. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!!! Berman totally screwed up the franchise. Examples - RESURRECTION/NEMESIS, and he needed to go, he ruined ENTERPRISE, with all that Xindi bullshit, when he should have filled all the gaps and answered the questions brought up in the original series, as was attempted in the 4th season, but it was too late to save the show from cancellation. Good Riddens Rick Berman. Letís hope Abrams doesnít make the same Mistakes.
I think a fantastic openning scene would be Jonathon Archer witnessing the Launch of 1701. They could even show her in "THE CAGE" version, with the Larger Deflector Dish, and Taller Bridge Dome, and nacelle spikes. Then when Kirk & Spock appear show her as she is in the Smithsonian, accentuating her Texture, and Detail. Archerís Bio says he lived to see the construction and launch of the ENTERPRISE-1701, and died of natural causes shortly after. I think that would make a great scene. then fade out and bring it up to the time of Kirk. similar things have been done before, and worked well. EXAMPLE - Dr. McCoy walking with DATA after touring the Enterprise D in the TNG Pilot.
In Closing, Star Trek Canon exists for a reason. DONíT F&*K WITH IT!!!!!!!!!! The Loyal Fans of TOS should be the 1st demographic Abrams should wish to please. 40 years folks, It has worked for 40 years, donít fix it if it isnít broken.
rideop1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 10:16 PM   #455
Arlo
Fleet Captain
 
Arlo's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise Pic

BolianAdmiral said:
^

Don't you dare look at me with that assumption... I merely posted my feelings and explained them, and when someone challenged my remark, I just came back and defended my position.
I was referring to many comments here, yours just set it off. There are people who are *freaking out* about welders, and building on earth, and the height of decks, you name it. I mean, It's fun to Zapruder all this stuff, I do it to, but people are treating this slightest bits of teaser material as if its the final locked print shipping to theaters.
__________________
"Even with all its blemishes, Trek XI still teabags the bloated corpses that were Insurrection and Nemesis and managed to make Trek fun again." - Sheep
Arlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 10:58 PM   #456
scotthm
Rear Admiral
 
Location: USA
Re: Enterprise Pic

BolianAdmiral said:
WHY should they go to all the trouble to build the components on the surface, somehow transport them up into space, and then do all the extra work to RE-assemble them, when the technology already exsists to just build the whole thing in space to begin with?
Wouldn't it really depend on where the bulk of the raw materials came from? If from Earth, then easier to build components on Earth. If from space, then easier to build the whole thing in space.

Enterprise was apparently largely built from Earthbound materials.

---------------
scotthm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 11:05 PM   #457
Thomas Riker
Commander
 
Location: Scotland
Re: Enterprise Pic

Vektor said:
Trek starships routinely zip around solar systems with little or no regard to gravitational influences
Ahem, TOS: "The Naked Time", TNG: "Relics", TNG: "Time Squared", TNG: "Cause and Effect", VOY: "Scientific Method", VOY: "Real Life", VOY: "The Void", ENT: "Anomaly", Star Trek Generations, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home ....

are all examples of when Federation and even non-federation starships have encountered gravitational influences and had major problems as a result. Its safe to say that even in the 23rd, 24th Century they still haven't mastered it.
__________________
"Trust me Quark. Darts and bars go together like bacon and eggs."
"At least people order bacon and eggs."
- O'Brien and Quark
Thomas Riker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 11:06 PM   #458
JBElliott
Commander
 
JBElliott's Avatar
 
Re: Enterprise Pic

Sharr Khan said:
It's old hat and makes the ships look more like something our of the present and less like something out of the future.
I love statements like this, since they presume to know the shape of the future. Regretfully the best most reliably gauge for that is taking a glance at the past since the future is always rooted in it.

If scifi is supposed to be extrapolating (if? I'm not sure it does that very well...) then it should be taking its cues from the NOW.

Sharr
Glad you like it. In this case, we do know the look of the future, at least the future in the Star Trek Universe. I'm not going to argue on the basis of "make things look like the did on TOS" rather I'm going to argue based on a few of the "fixed points" of the future that Kirk and Spock inhabit.

In that future there is faster than light travel based on "warp drive", energy from matter-antimatter reactions, matter to energy to matter conversions so perfect that people use it as a mode of transportation. Now then, given those technologies, welding just wouldn't be done since any item could be beamed into existence whole.

Of course, there could be some "made up" reason why welding would be used in construction and panelling would be necessary, but those types of reasons are not more valid that the idea of construction via the transporter and are less valid since the above "fixed points" in future technology are a given in Star Trek.

If SciFi is only about extrapolating and taking its cues from the NOW, the read stuff by Aurther C. Clarke. I do and I think is work is great. But if you want Star Trek, then you have to swallow all the technological "fixed points" listed above and their logical consequences.

What really can we look at in today's technology that can be extrapolated to a faster than light warp drive starship? Nothing. Not the Apollo space crafts, not the space shuttle, not aircraft carriers, nothing.
__________________
iPhone 2 iComm
JBElliott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 11:32 PM   #459
Holytomato
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Enterprise Pic

The "TRIALS & TRIBBLATIONS"-DS9" version is the way it looked in the series before it was addeded to the space scenes via blue screen.

The ""IN A MIRROR DARKLY"-Enterprise." design is way the model looks in the Smith (added vertical lines on the secondary hull, and nacelles) with added azetecing and the impulse engines glowing blue.

What about the TOS-R version? Originally it was the DS9 design but now its slowly being brought closer to the Smith's.

So which is it?

"In Closing, Star Trek Canon exists for a reason. DONíT F&*K WITH IT!!!!!!!!!! The Loyal Fans of TOS should be the 1st demographic Abrams should wish to please. 40 years folks, It has worked for 40 years, donít fix it if it isnít broken."

Nemesis bombed. Enterprise was cancelled. Thank goodness JJ is not paying attention to hardcore fans.

Will Spock be an emotionally red skinned Martian? Will James Kirk's middle inintal be an R?

Oh wait...

Star Trek must die with us!!!!!!! Anyone remember William Shakes-speare? Does anyone remember that Edward de Vere wrote under that alias?

No.

Why?

His friends, and fans knew if they cared about him and his work that they should show it by destroying his works. :thumbsup:
Holytomato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23 2008, 11:35 PM   #460
Sharr Khan
Rear Admiral
 
Sharr Khan's Avatar
 
Location: USA Ct
View Sharr Khan's Twitter Profile
Re: Enterprise Pic

"In Closing, Star Trek Canon exists for a reason. DONíT F&*K WITH IT!!!!!!!!!! The Loyal Fans of TOS should be the 1st demographic Abrams should wish to please. 40 years folks, It has worked for 40 years, donít fix it if it isnít broken."
Star Trek canon exists so Paramount can say what is and is not Trek (which is whatever they choose to label as such). Its not some holy unchangeable writ sent down by god.

And "Fans" there aren't enough of them that would make it worthwhile for Paramount to please - plus usually what the fans want is dumb.

Sharr
Sharr Khan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 24 2008, 12:03 AM   #461
rideop1
Ensign
 
Re: Enterprise Pic

To HolyTomato...........When I mentioned RELICS, DS9, and IN A MIRROR DARKLY, i was referring to the Bridge set design, not the Ship Exterior. But regarding what you said, Yes the Ship varied in all those episodes, but stayed true to the Original Jeffries design. Thank you for sort of making my point for me.

To Shar...........I have to disagree about the demographic. All original 6 Movies kicked ass at the box office with a majority, a large majority of the viewers being fans. But we all know what they say about opinions.
rideop1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 24 2008, 02:52 AM   #462
Vektor
Rear Admiral
 
Vektor's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA, USA
Re: Enterprise Pic

BolianAdmiral said:
That's just the point... there ARE NO logistics to building this thing on the ground... not when a ship OLDER than the Connie has been shown to be built into orbit...
This is easily explained: The ability to cheaply and easily lift a fully assembled starship into orbit is something that wasnít developed or fully refined until after the NX class ships were built. Prior to that, building them planetside was simply not an option regardless of any advantages or disadvantages it may have.

plus, you're just not seeing my point on this... it makes NO sense, from a practicality standpoint... WHY should they go to all the trouble to build the components on the surface, somehow transport them up into space, and then do all the extra work to RE-assemble them, when the technology already exsists to just build the whole thing in space to begin with? Why waste all that extra time, energy, and maybe even cost? It is just not practical, in terms of manufacturing, technology, or economics.
At the time the NX-01 was built, it probably would have been possible to build it on the ground and then fly it or lift it into orbit. All of the requisite technology existed, including ant-gravity, inertial compensation, etc. The reason they didnít at that time is probably because most or all of the infrastructure for building starships was already in orbit, as it had to be prior to the development of those technologies, but thereís nothing that says it had to stay there once ground-based construction became a viable option.

New technologies and innovations often lead to completely different ways of doing things. The process of actually building something is and probably always will be simpler, cheaper and safer to do on Earth than it is in space. Somebody probably figured out that they could retrofit a couple of old shipyards for building entire warp engines, deflector assemblies or whatever and then lift them into orbit for final assembly using tractor beams or cheap anti-grav boosters. Before long, youíve got a whole new Earth-based manufacturing and construction industry, and less than a century later youíre building entire starships like the Enterprise on the ground in San Francisco and floating them up to orbit under their own power.

Are you telling me that if you are the boss of the company that had a contract to build something like that, that YOU would want to spend the extra money and resources, manpower and energy to do all that extra crap? If so, you're company won't be making much money, with that philosophy. If you can do it cheaper and faster, with the same output quality, you will.
Your starting from the assumption that it would require extra money, resources, manpower and energy, which isnít necessarily true given the kind of technology we know exists in the 23rd century Trek universe. If I were the boss of the company and I had an Earth-based construction facility where I didnít have to expend half of all those resources just to keep my workers alive and breathing, youíre damn straight I would build it on the ground. If getting it into orbit after it was built was hard or flat out impossible like it is today then that would be a different story, but the same technology that allows starships to accelerate at literally millions of gravities would render that part of the process pretty much moot.

Iím serious about this. Star Trek has never treated the influence of planetary gravity as anything more than a minor nuisance except when the shipís engines were damaged or disabled. Based on everything weíve seen, getting a ship off the surface of a planet and into space is basically a non-issue, which leaves the construction environment as the deciding factor and I just donít see how a shirtsleeve Earth-based shipyard loses that contest once the infrastructure is in place to support it.
__________________
www.vektorvisual.com
Vektor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 24 2008, 02:58 AM   #463
Sharr Khan
Rear Admiral
 
Sharr Khan's Avatar
 
Location: USA Ct
View Sharr Khan's Twitter Profile
Re: Enterprise Pic

To Shar...........I have to disagree about the demographic. All original 6 Movies kicked ass at the box office with a majority, a large majority of the viewers being fans. But we all know what they say about opinions.
But that hasn't been true for a long while now. Trek performance among the fans and the fanbase itself has shrunk - time to start making *new fans*, its always better to aim for a broader audience regarding popular entertainment - well that's part of the issue Trek hasn't been "popular entertainment" for awhile now. Time to make it so again.

Sharr
Sharr Khan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 24 2008, 02:59 AM   #464
Vektor
Rear Admiral
 
Vektor's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA, USA
Re: Enterprise Pic

Thomas Riker said:
Ahem, TOS: "The Naked Time", TNG: "Relics", TNG: "Time Squared", TNG: "Cause and Effect", VOY: "Scientific Method", VOY: "Real Life", VOY: "The Void", ENT: "Anomaly", Star Trek Generations, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home ....
Yeah, and in almost every case the gravitational influences involved were either far beyond the pull of Earth or the ship was suffering some kind of engine difficulty or they were making deliberate use of gravity to accomplish something else like a slingshot maneuever. Really, just think about it. For starships to do half the things we've seen them do under normal operating conditions, they would have to be capable of enduring stresses and overcoming influences that make climbing out of Earth's gravity well absolutely pale by comparison.
__________________
www.vektorvisual.com
Vektor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 24 2008, 03:34 AM   #465
rideop1
Ensign
 
Re: Enterprise Pic

Am I the Onbly one that read "The Making Of Star Trek" ands numerous other publications that stated the ENTERPRISE was constructed in orbit under the aegis of the old san Francisco Navy Yard? Oh yea, i forgot, the hell with canon and the past. This is the new Star Trek, so F*&K the last 40 years, we are starting over with a new vision. I guess in the new Star Trek Universe, environmental suits and space docks aren't in Star Fleet's Budget. I bet they are using cheap "alien" labor too.
rideop1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.